AdDaMan
ClioSport Club Member
ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
Lamborghini Aventador Crash Video In Sloane Street
- Thread starter Cliosaregay
- Start date
Ford Mustang 5.0
I Wonder if the Black Cab Driver Flased out the Mazda and they just didnt look the other way and pulled out thinking it was clear. Seen that happen loads of times on claims in the past.
Eitherway looks like both drivers werent hurt which is the main think. I think the Lambo Driver can afford to fix it either way
Neil
Eitherway looks like both drivers werent hurt which is the main think. I think the Lambo Driver can afford to fix it either way
Neil
STICKER TWONK
ClioSport Club Member
Golf GTi DSG
So someone pulls out a junction, into the path of an oncoming car, yet its the oncoming car who is at fault? CS Logic.
MarkCup
ClioSport Club Member
But it's not that black and white though, is it?
If the Lambo driver was doing 100 mph would the Mazda driver still be at fault?
Is it reasonable to expect a car to be doing that sort of speed when the limit is, and you are checking for cars doing, 20-30 mph?
If you have to expect vehicles traveling at any speed whatsoever then you would never ever pull out of a side junction as there could always be an Aventador doing 200 mph coming that you've no chance of seeing or anticipating. You have to cater for the lowest common denominator and not everyone pays full attention on the road...you have to accept and work with that if you want to remain safe.
I know full well that if I were making progress well in excess of the speed limit and someone pulled out on me...I'd consider myself the one at fault if I smashed into them...much as I know insurers may well see it differently.
If the Lambo driver was doing 100 mph would the Mazda driver still be at fault?
Is it reasonable to expect a car to be doing that sort of speed when the limit is, and you are checking for cars doing, 20-30 mph?
If you have to expect vehicles traveling at any speed whatsoever then you would never ever pull out of a side junction as there could always be an Aventador doing 200 mph coming that you've no chance of seeing or anticipating. You have to cater for the lowest common denominator and not everyone pays full attention on the road...you have to accept and work with that if you want to remain safe.
I know full well that if I were making progress well in excess of the speed limit and someone pulled out on me...I'd consider myself the one at fault if I smashed into them...much as I know insurers may well see it differently.
Insurance logic, chap. Recent experience with something similar; a family member was at fault pulling out of a B road, the claim went down 50:50. The other party were on the wrong side of road, overtaking stationary lorries in an industrial park. This was used against them by "our" side.
When I were young and stupid I took my old mans Alfa 145 down a 30 at 65. Some fucker pulled out on me. Idiots eh?
The average stopping distance at 30mph is 6 car lengths, have a look at point of impact , look at where he stops and the parked cars and therefore the distance , take into account the wheels were not on the ground after the impact , and then tell me he was doing a stupid speed .
Granted its not your average car , but factor in panic and reaction ,and i doubt if he was barely doing more than 30 at point of impact.
i have also backed it up with some visual clues rather than aventador + noise = nailing it , as an aventador doing 10mph revs high and sounds loud .
Granted its not your average car , but factor in panic and reaction ,and i doubt if he was barely doing more than 30 at point of impact.
i have also backed it up with some visual clues rather than aventador + noise = nailing it , as an aventador doing 10mph revs high and sounds loud .
His brake light was already on at the time of the impact, so he must have been going way quicker than 30 at the point the mazda committed to pull out IMHO, and hence was braking during his approach, so although his speed had come down at the point of impact it was most probably far higher just before, although obviously you cant get a definitive answer from that video.
And IIRC from all the press release bumf the aventador brakes are FAR from average, it was one of the things they were raving about in fact.
If he wasnt speeding then he sure as hell wasnt paying much attention as that mazda came out fairly slowly and with brakes that IIRC do about 4 seconds flat from 100mph to zero I would imagine he wouldnt have even needed to brake for 1 second to stop from 30?
There was enough energy to lift his car up off the ground onto the rear 2 wheels at the initial impact despite its initial nose down stance from having the brakes applied and to also complete destroy the corner of mazda and still keep going too.
I still reckon at the point the mazda decided to pull out that aventador was nearer to 100mph than to the speed limit, and over 30 still even at the moment it hit, but thats just my opinion from the video.
think about where the driver was sitting (LHD) and then think about the point the mazda actually pulled out ,
those things will have been factors as well , not saying whose fault though i suspect the mazda driver is screwed on this one , but i don't think that people have taken all the circumstances into account here , because its someone rich in a supercar.
UR R26R.5, VW Golf R
Max hasn't posted in this thread, yet.
Keep saying max over and over in your head. After about 18 times I got a vision of a Big Mac in my head.
And if you write Aventador backwards it reads Rod Atneva who sold a dog to one of the missing Malaysian planes air stewardesses.
UR R26R.5, VW Golf R
I thought that too but figured I was missing something.
EFA and agreed. You drive to the conditions. 30+ in London is a no no.
Ive nothing against rich people with supercars, in fact I have friends in that bracket, Im not biased because of that, I am just going by the fact that a car which enters the screen with its brake lights on and appearing to be raked forward from braking hard then bounces up onto the rear wheels only as it hits two cars, still has enough momentum to damage both cars, then end up on 2 side wheels, then bounce off another car, and then eventually stop, thats a hell of a lot of energy and it only comes from speed, so to have that much speed left after its already been braking, on a car with such good brakes, makes me think it was substantially speeding.
Writing on the door?
GiT
ClioSport Club Member
Shit little Yaris...
Mazda and Lambo caused it.
Mazda for pulling out, Lambo for speeding.
If Mazda man has a good enough lawyer, it'll go his was as at proper speeds, the Lambo would never of been at that point of the road...
...but Lambo Lad Lawyer will counter with "Do you always pull out into moving traffic?"
Will be juicy and very, very Arab lol
Mazda for pulling out, Lambo for speeding.
If Mazda man has a good enough lawyer, it'll go his was as at proper speeds, the Lambo would never of been at that point of the road...
...but Lambo Lad Lawyer will counter with "Do you always pull out into moving traffic?"
Will be juicy and very, very Arab lol
GiT
ClioSport Club Member
Shit little Yaris...
Spot on. The video helps Mazda Man in one way, not another. I should expect a 50/50.
i was thinking that too.. ha .. if you look at it again at normal speed,i say the lambo is at fault more, what about the poor bmw owner , they have done nothing.. . would there be cctv of the crash too..to make a better judgement who is at fault...
at the end of the vid, the aa man is looking for the engine... ha
Last edited:
TBH the Lamborghini's speed was a causal factor in the accident just as much as the person pulling out was - it was travelling far faster than a car pulling out of that junction would reasonably expect it to be going (on or mildly above the speed limit)
If the Mazda driver had a better lawyer than the Lambo one does, that could be swung to 50/50 I'd imagine. But he won't.
If the Mazda driver had a better lawyer than the Lambo one does, that could be swung to 50/50 I'd imagine. But he won't.
So because he doesn't drive a lambo means he cant afford a good lawyer.
Makes sense.
Makes sense.
I fail to see how that isn't a reasonable assumption to make? I'm sure there's a 0.01% chance he's a millionaire with absolutely no interest in cars, but there's also a 99.99% chance it's just some average bloke who will end up using his insurer's legal cover.
There are plenty of millionaires out there who care not one iota about cars.
Why did you quote my post, and type out a reply, if you clearly haven't read it?
Indeed, but he said 99.99% of people in s**t cars arent millionaires so is working on most likely assumption
